Yet another fish variant. / Is wtf/r really optimal?

[Zelyon]

Mods: This is not meant to be a discussion on WTF/r though that's what it initially sounds like. It's actually a discussion of a significantly different variant. If the variant was indeed similar to wtf/r, I would put it in the WTF/r thread.

Anyways, I believe this is Jacob's personal build...

Worse Than Fish: the Reprise (aka WTF/r):
4 River Boa
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Spiketail Hatchling
2 Call of the Herd
1 Gorilla Shaman

4 Force of Will
2 Oxidize (I might cut one)
1 Stifle
4 Curiosity
4 Brainstorm
3 Null Rod
1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall

4 Mishra’s Factory
4 Tropical Island
4 Volcanic Island
4 Polluted Delta (could just as easily be strand or foothills, or a mix)
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald

Without any disrespect to Jacob, I believe that WTF/r is a subpar variant of fish that doesn't properly utilize the underlying synergies that make fish so powerful. I am certain that many of the people who have played both gay/r and wtf/r for any lenghty period of time will agree with most of the assertions I make below. This thread is meant to discuss yet another variant of fish, one that does truly and optimally utilize fish's underlying synergies and resiliency while also sustaining the many strengths that the green splash offers wtf/r. I believe it to be the next logical step in taking what was previously a very well tuned and powerful metagame deck (gay/r) and making into a versatile deck that can sustain itself in numerous metas (including metas where good aggro decks will be a presence).

It seems to be the conventional wisdom that good aggro decks will be a presence at gencon on account of the international players bound to show up there and the recent success that The Man Show has had. I'm sure the inability to use proxies will force atleast a decent number of players to bring decks such as tuned r/g beats, madness, and various other somewhat roguish choices. Thus, the prediction seems to be that a deck like wtf/r which while not being able to beat such decks consistently can atleast hold it's own against them well enough that will make it farther up the tournament ladder than gay/r would. I believe that a deck like the one outlined below will be a strong option for such an environment.

I will begin with a discussion with the components of WTF/r that I disagree with. I am certain that many WTF/r players who have previously played gay/r will share many of these same observations.

The Creature Base
Call of the Herd is a very subpar option in WTF/r. It's very mana hungry, too much so for a deck like fish. The reason fish avoids three drop bombs (even powerful evasive ones like serendib efreet that can acutally pitch to FoW in a pinch) is because they eat up too much mana in the midgame, make both daze and wasteland not nearly as effective (second turn wasteland or daze was always a key play with fish) when you should be casting multiple threats per turn. WTF/r in general is far slower and more mana hungry than fish. It's disruption comes out later as it can't daze or waste a land nearly as early. The lack of clouds means that it can't play multiple threats second turn. Not to mention that it's often wise if not absolutely neccesary to leave a green mana open to deter a fire/ice targeting your river boa. What synergy and/or neccesary function does call of the herd share with fish? It's neither disruptive nor cheap and evasive (thus making it a weak curiosity target).

The Draw
I'm not quite convinced that brainstorm is an adequate or neccesary replacement for standstill. I believe that anyone who has used standstill for any lenght of time will agree with me on just how strong a card it is in a deck like fish. So why is it essential that it be replaced? Gay/r works fine without running any fairie conclaves.  And Cloud of Faries is hardly a poor creature. The way it allows fish to overwhelm it's opponents with threats turn two, the tempo it generates, it's synergy with library of alexandria, and the fact that it's an evasive body that works beautifully with curiosity all lend credence to the idea that it is a great inclusion in any fish variant. And standstill is a very fearsome threat invulnerable to removal like disenchant and chain of vapors all on it's own. So considering this, wouldn't WTF/r be better off simply not playing the fairie conclave while still retaining standstill?

The Mana Curve
In addition, I'm sure that most wtf/r players agree that this deck often draws either too much mana or too little mana with respect to the cards it has in it's hand. This is because the manabase is inconsistant. In fact, the wtf/r players I've played with have so tired of drawing mana source after mana source that they cut back on the number of mana sources leaving themselves vulnerable to not being able to cast call of the herd till very late in the game. 25 mana sources is sometimes actually too low a number for this deck. This is because the deck doesn't play free evasive early curiosity targets like cloud of faries, needs mana open to regenerate boa in addition to activating factories and lavamancers and needs yet more mana to properly utilize the call of the herd. Unfortunatley, the rest of the deck simply was designed to run on a smaller more streamlined mana base. This can lead to inconsistencies for wtf/r. Inconsistances such as having multiple high mana investment threats such as call of the herds and river boas without sufficient mana and sometimes having numerous mana sources and yet no expensive threats to cast with them. Brainstorm helps to smooth this out a bit, but it doesn't do nearly enough.

WTF/r as it currently stands lost too much in the transition to be nearly as effective a tempo deck as fish. The mere fact that it's not as capable of wasting a land or dazing a spell second turn takes a great deal away from fish's stragety.

Note, I'm not suggesting that a green splash in fish isn't worthwhile. I believe it to be very worthwhile. Because there is one card is fish in addition to the Fairie Conclaves that IS subpar, Voidmage Prodigy. Exactly what is the role of Voidmage Prodigy in fish? Is it mana denial (wastelands, daze, spiketail)? is it disruption (daze, stifle, fow, spiketail, misd, null rod, shaman, possibly oxidize and lavamancer)? is it actual draw/card advantage (curiosity, standstill)? does it make it under standstill? is it either a very powerful or very cheap evasive threat that acts well with both curiosity and standstill (cloud of faries, riverboa, spiketail hatchling)? is it even an effective threat against any deck that runs any creatures (most of the decks in the current meta)? Does it shore up fish's worst matchups (aggro and fast combo)? Without any of these qualities, is such a high casting cost critter worth running?

Yes, voidmage is disruption, but against control, fish's and especially wtf/r's strongest matchup. It does next to nothing to disrupt either fast combo or good aggro (the two matchups that fish and wtf/r actually fear). Any gencon version of fish should

So what alternative would actually work in the type of meta that gencon is expected to be (with some presence by madness and workshop aggro like the manshow and possibly even decks like r/g beats)? Packing some maindeck means to deal with such decks is a neccisity for fish. It simply has far too many good and versatile sideboard options that it neither wants, nor can afford to give any significant number or slots for aggro hate. Consider that Voidmage Prodigy is a creature, and it must thus be replaced with a creature as well in order for the threat count to stay on par.

Razorfin Hunter can be dismissed as it does next to nothing to against madness, workshop aggro or r/g beats. Serendib Efreet has the same too high a casting cost as Call of the Herd but is worse against aggro. Hidden Gibbons, I ruled this out the moment I realized how dead it is against workshop aggro.

This leaves us with River Boa and possibly even Quirion Dryad! The River Boa is the most versatile choice as it's evasive and extremely useful against other decks as well. But it can only effectively hold one attacker at bay at a time. With all the hype Dryad seemed to be getting of late, it seems worth testing. And in testing, the Dryad actually proves to be game breaking especially against decks like Madness and Workshop that have no way to deal with it. So which alternative you pick is wholly dependent on just how large a presence you expect workshop aggro and madnell. 1. Few if any other non green spells. 2. Enough disruption and countermagic to protect it early on until it grows beyond things like fire/ice. 3. Almost all low casting cost cards (and many of them like daze, fow, cloud of faries etc being free) so that multiples can be played each turn.

The dryad can easily be a 4/4 or 5/5 a turn or two after you cast it. This is because of how fish itself functions. It loves to play daze or force of will followed up by cloud of faries, and curiosity or grim lavamancer, and standstill it's next turn. And it often can. This is why standstill actually functions very well with dryad as stupid as that sounds!? You are virtually guarenteed to play either a daze or a force of will the turn you cast the dryad. If not, you will very likely play a curiosity or a cloud of faries or a grim lavamancer the next turn immediatley following up with a standstill. The deck is virtually guarenteed to play atleast one of these cards but usually more the turn after dryad is cast but prior to playing standstill. So when standstill resolves, the dryad will a 3/3 which is sufficently large enough in type 1 to really pressure the opponent into breaking the standstill asap. With a 3/3 on the board even if it's all by itself (very rare), they can't afford to wait to break standstill. By the time they break standstill, you will have drawn and be able to cast enough cards that dryad becomes an absolute monster.

Almost every instance in which the dryad grew to a 4/4 or bigger, the opponent lost the game regardless of how many threats they got into play that game. And against madness and workshop aggro which play no removal (earlier than weldering up a trisk atleast), resolving the dryad often swung the game in this deck's favor. And the 4/4 was certainly no slouch against control. Remember, fish does have the countermagic to protect the dryad. And a smart opponent aims at stuff like standstill and curiosity instead anyways. As a result of fish having so many must counter threats, dryads are often left alone and can thus even wreck havoc on decks like 4c control that do play countermagic. So if you expect any real presence of workshop aggro or madness at gencon, I would certainly play the dryads over the river boa. They are rarely a poor choice. But the boas are certainly more versatile.

Edit:

This is the current build...

4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Cloud of Fairies
4 Spiketail Hatchling
4 Quirion Dryad

3 Null Rod
2 Daze
1 Crucible of Worlds
4 Force of Will
4 Curiosity
4 Standstill
1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall

4 Mishra’s Factory
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
3 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald

Sideboard
1 Null Rod
3 Red Elemental Blast
2 Blue Elemental Blast
2 Artifact Mutation
2 Maze of Ith
2 Stifle
2 Fire/Ice
1 Rack and Ruin

[Toad]

Standstill in WTF/r will make Baby Jacob cry.

[Zelyon]

It's not so much about standstill (you can just as easily use brainstorm if you want) as it is about the inconsistencies inherent in wtf/r.

3 casting cost creatures don't go well with wasteland and daze.

25 mana sources don't go well with normal fish's extremely low mana curve (and this deck isn't really that different from normal fish).

and Standstill is just better than brainstorm in any deck synergetic with it IMO. Cloud of Faries is just better as well, and Fairie Conclave is wholly unneccesary for standstill to be playable.

[austinnadz]

I like what you've stated and written here. it was written in a very logical and well organized fashion, kudos to you. but you act like you made such a revelation. when in fact, you basically only changed about four cards in the deck.

the up to date version most people are running in wtf/r (I believe) is 6 fetches, probably 1-2 oxidize (if any), maybe 2 stifles, 1-2 call of the herd, and of course, brainstorm over standstill.

yes, it does make sense to run standstill with cloud of faeries. you drop a cloud, then you drop a standstill. that's a powerful play where you can lay beats like it's nobody's business while drawing cards. you can utilize that and be none the wiser.

however, in the match against fish, brainstorm would be appear to be superior. they can run conclaves, and factories, when you can only run the factories, and when you draw into standstill you're like, crap, I can't use the stanstill. not to say that you can use brainstorm that easily either, you'd still have to break the standstill to be able to brainstorm. it has always appeared to me that the person who wins the match against fish is the person who resolves the pinger first. you drop a spiketail, I ping it. you resolve a cloud, I ping it. but, if you drop a call of the herd they say, I can't ping this, can I? yes, the call of the herd is mana hungry and maybe it needs a relacement (rogue elephants? lol) this does look like a decent build, but I hardly think that in comparison the orlove build of wtf/r is suboptimal.

nice work though and good evidence, it's nice to see that you just didn't say, that build is crap, this build is superior.

[Smmenen]

Zelyon,

First I want to say welcome to the mana drain.  Your post was insightful and well written, and it took very little to persuade me that you are correct.  In testing recently, I agree that one of the key synergies is to be able to Curiosity a Cloud or, at the least, be able to do something the same turn you drop a Cloud.  

In addition, I think the changes you have made make alot of sense.  However, it is worth noting, something that you either overlooked or failed to mention, is that even if UR Fish is an inherently stronger deck, WTF/r may be a superior metagame choice, even in the inferior build you mentioned.  However, I can't see a single reason to play Jacob's build over yours, unless I'm missing something crucial.

Stephen Menendian

[Jacob Orlove]

I think part of the problem people are having with the wtf/r manabase is that they're not running the full 3 moxen. A turn one Mox is key if your opponent has an early crucible or trinisphere (you have to go first for it to help against the 3sphere, but it means the 3sphere actually does very little to slow your tempo). The Moxes also help accelerate all the creatures--a turn one spiketail is very nice, as is a turn 2 Call against some decks. Granted, the moxen can get turned off by the null rods, but the early boost they provide generates enough tempo that clouds become redundant, in my experience.

In addition, with the 6 fetches, you cut down your potential mana draws quickly. They also let brainstorm help fix mana-flush hands. In addition to doing that, brainstorm can help pull you out of mana problems. Even so, however, I do find myself occasionally having to mulligan hands with too many lands, as well as ones with too few.

With the rise of Crucibles in everything, I think running more mana sources is actually beneficial, because while they waste turn after turn wastelanding your lands, you can drop threats and take advantage of their major tempo sacrifices, while drawing into enough lands to keep you going.

Sure, there will be a few hands where you draw a ridiculous amount of land, but with 4 factories and 5 strips, that's not so terrible. And with the deck's three colors, I find people will often try to strip one of my colored lands, to try to shut down, say, my red cards. Holding back a fetch can encourage this kind of play, and generate even more tempo for me.

And then there's Sundering Titan. With too few lands, I'd be worried about this guy constantly wrecking me. As it is, I can hold back lands in my hand, or leave a fetch on the table, to prepare for the one-sided armageddon.

Finally, I personally don't run Daze, since I'd rather have my other disruption. If you want to run Daze, then you might indeed have to adjust the mana base.

Now, on Call of the Herd, I've found it very strong in certain matchups. Granted, it's my first choice to SB out for Artifact Mutations, but against control decks and other fish decks, it can be a savage beating. With Brainstorms, I need higher card quality, and not so much cheap cards that let me dump my hand quickly. Thus, Call gets the nod over something like Cloud. With Standstill, Cloud is probably too synergistic to pass up on, even though it's not a very strong card on its own. Plus, with Standstill, 3cc cards are bad news.

Also, a quick note: Gay/Rdoesn't run Serendib because of standstill, but also because Serendib is actually surprisingly bad--I know, because I tested it in the Call slot, and it never won me any games.

As for Brainstorm/Standstill, I think we'll have to agree to disagree, which unfortunately means that a number of my arguments don't apply to your deck, which seems like an excellent way to add green to Gay/R.

[BreathWeapon]

While I fully agree with the author's sentiments, this deck is not new. In St.Louis, several players have piloted U/r/g Fish or WTF/r with Stills and Clouds to success in the local metagame. We've been working on the deck for roughly 2 months now, tho' I don't believe any of us have played with Dryads to my knowledge.

At any rate, I'm glad to see other players are coming to the same conclusions we have about this deck in different geographical locations. It shows that the Green Splash in Fish is more than just a flight of fancy.

Thanks for articulating your points so well about the deck, and welcome to TMD.

[Zelyon]

Thank you very much for the kind comments. I am not surprised that there are similar variants already being played all over.

I would like to add that the more I've tried the quirion dryad, the more it feels like it very much belongs in the deck. I would be very interesting in hearing about any variants that used the dryad. It makes certain otherwise very difficult matchups winnable. I've actually been surprise at just how powerful a threat he is against various aggro decks such the Man Show in the games that I used it. I know that the card seems somewhat scrubby and it's understandable why many people are hesistant to try it, but it's certainly a very viable alternative to the river boa against certain matchups. Indeed, pingers can hurt in the mirror and I understand why call of the herd helps in such instances. But the calls can still be traded with a lone factory or some other creature and the lavamancer which effectively deters you from attacking with it if they have a blocking creature. Your opponent still effectively retains control of the board, atleast until you have the mana to flash it back (and a smart opponent wouldn't let that occur). But with the dryad, even if your opponent has a lavamancer out, it's not difficult to pump the dryad up to a 3/3 before they can untap or get the graveyard needed to activate the lavamancer simply by fizzling a daze (or better yet, stifling a lavamancer) and casting some spell (ancestral recall, time walk, standstill) etc. Once the lavamancer grows to a 3/3, there is little that an opposing fish player can do to prevent you from pumping it up to a very large side and winning the game with it. Unlike the call of the herd however, the dryad doesn't hurt fish's tempo, doesn't require one to play 25 mana sources, doesn't deter it from wasting a land turn two, and doesn't act like a nice juicy mana drain target.

Obviously, there are many situations where river boa is clearly the superior choice (against Mask for example). I've never seen the dryad grown to a 12/12 before turn 7 and a mask would have killed you by then. But Mask is a very easy matchup for fish anyways and is a matchup that fish almost never faces in the current meta.

Against tog, the dryad can't continously chump block like boa, but it can probably absorb enough damage to delay them from going full force by berserking their tog for atleast one more turn. This one turn is often a bigger advantage.

Against 4c control, dryad is one of the few chances you have to be able to race a face up exalted angel. With the numerous better countermagic and swords targets you play (curiosity, standstill, curious faries etc), most 4c control player underestimate how important the dryad is to deal with asap.

I would be very interested to hear what you have to say on the matter Jacob. Have you tested dryad in wtf/r? I suspect you might have been playing too many other green spells in the build (4 boas and 2-3 oxidizes) at the time if you did for dryad to be worthwhile in place of the call of the herds.

I am very interested in trying either a 4 dryad configuration or a 3 dryad/2 boa configuration from now on.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

Dreadnaught has trample so boa is useless in blocking it.

But, other than that I agree with most of what you said.  I think that dryad is better in a standstill/cloud build that in tradional wtf/r, because you are drawing and casting spells immediatly, and thus can take advantage of that with a growing dryad.  It would probably be less useful in the brainstorm WTF/r because of the overall higher cc and the fact that it is slower in casting spells and draws fewer cards.

[monstre]

I've actually been playing with dryads for a few weeks since someone suggested it on this forum a while ago. I'm far from an expert, but I figured I would chime in with my limited experience. I like dryads because they don't require a tropical island to stay on the board in order to remain effective. Between the boas and lavamancers, I think WTF places to much strain on its mana base. I'm not sure the third color is even worth splashing but, if it is, I feel confident in the choice of dryads over boas. The apparent tension between standstills and dyads is really just a myth for reasons Zelyon articulated so well.

My mana base was identical to Zelyon's except for a basic island replacing the seventh fetch land. I also played with the sapphire and so I have to question its absence as I feel it should be in there as a 24th mana source. I do agree however that the faerie conclaves are unnecessary for stanstill to function properly.

I like where this deck is going, but I have to wonder wether any three-color variant is worth the unstable mana base. I think this deck is better than WTF though, so for me the question is wether it's better than the red/blue version. I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that one.

[BreathWeapon]

Keeping Tropical on the board is only pertinant vs Aggro or Aggro Control (Except GAT which doesn't use Strips), Boa is still a 2 Power Curiousity target vs any decks with Islands ... I hear that's a lot

[austinnadz]

very true breath weapon. river boas have an evasion factor that dryads do not. so I guess the choice of the boas and the dryads come down to this: evasion regenerator with curiosity? or a massive creature eater?

[Zelyon]

Who was it on here that initially suggesting using dryad in fish? I would be very interested to hear their thoughts on this. The dryad is something I really wouldn't have believed to work as well in fish as it is proving to. I would be very interested to hear from anyone that reached the same conclusion.

WTF/r needed another evasive curiosity target in the form of boa because it cut the cloud of faries. this deck runs cloud of faries. so it's not neccesary for the green creature slot to be an evasive one. also dryad is certainly not a poor curiosity target by any definition.

like i said, it is almost a certainity that you either play a daze, or a force or will, or some creature or standstill the turn after playing the dryad. so with the curiosity, that makes the dryad a 3/3. Agaisnt most every matchup, an attacking 3/3 can't be blocked without your opponent losing a valuable creature. So whether you draw a card or they lose a creature, you gain card advantage. Against those matchups where a 3/3 isn't big enough (madness, the man show etc.) there is little doubt in my mind that the dryad is a far superior option to the river boa any ways.

As for the debate over which is better u/r fish or this, I believe that's entirely determined by your metagame. U/r fish is almost certainly a better matchup against decks like tog, slaver etc. This is a slightly more versatile deck. It's better at fighting off aggro, especially fatty packed aggro decks like Madness and the Man Show. It's kind of a toss up against the 4c control matchup. The u/r mana base is less vulnerable to their wastelands and mana denial, but the dryad allows you to win even if they resolve an angel. I haven't done sufficent testing to say with confident which is greater benefit against 4c control.

[BreathWeapon]

I believe Eastman created a Standstill/Dryad list awhile back, however it was Centroles/Rancor/Banned Name that suggested Dryad in Urg Fish. IMO, I think the fact that Boa is an evasive creature is what justifies Urg Fish's ability to cut Conclaves. I definatley wouldn't say that Dryad is strictly superior, because he requires time to be of any worth to the deck. Boas are always good and don't require any sequence of effects to perform at maximum capacity.

[Matt]

Who was it on here that initially suggesting using dryad in fish?

In this thread, about ten posts in, Jacob says "Edit: this was my response to a PM suggestion of Dryad, but it should go in the thread too:". That PM was from me, though his response seems to indicate that he'd heard it from someone before. Barring that, I guess you can give me credit if you want, but it's not important - Type One people care wayy too much about that sort of thing.

[Zelyon]

Thx guys. I appreciate it.

I can see how the river boas are strictly superior options in wtf/r though. wtf/r cuts the cloud of faries. Running only 4 flyers (all 4 of which you may have to sac) means that curiosity is no longer the broken card drawer it once was. Also wtf/r runs a lot more green which hurts dryad. And it runs fatter creatures saccing the ability to play multiple cards per turn. It's not the ideal place for dryad.

In a deck like this however, the dryad can be abused. The evasion of the boas isn't nearly as important when running clouds.

[austinnadz]

has it been effectively tested to run clouds and boas? two evasive creatures are by far better than one right? not to mention the fact that adding in fairies over CoTH gives you one more thing pitchable to force of will. also something I've tended to do most often is place the curiosity on the grim lavamancer and ping or attack the opponent and draw a card with it. it's another form of damage (Irrelevant digression removed. ) of which you can draw a card or two off.

though I think to utilize the faerie's maximum ability of untapping up to two lands and then dropping a standstill in the opponent's face wouldn't it be optimum to run four instead of three faeries as suggested?

[Raven Fire]

Irrelevant digression removed.

[austinnadz]

Irrelevant digression removed.

[yodoblec]

I really like your update on the WTF/r deck. Standstill is like you said, the superior card in the Standstill-Brainstorm debate.

People who believe that fish is as powerful with Brainstorm in Standstill's spot need to really see the power of Standstill. It is a little different in WTF/r since the mana base is a little shaky. If you do something like Factory, Mox--Standstill chances are that you'll win the game.

Fish doesn't win with fat bombs or 3-mana spells, it wins with crappy creatures like Spiketail and Cloud of Fairies which create tempo swings, which is what causes fish to win in my experience.

Edit: I've been testing a WTF/r build myself, I'll post my update later.

[Zelyon]

Thank you for the compliments.

Yes I very much would like to run 4 cloud of faries but I'm having trobule finding room for the fourth.

The disruption base is already too low for the deck to be cut into. I really would like to find room for it in the creature base as the deck already runs 16 creatures. Unfortunatley, all the alternatives are simply superior.

Depending on the metagame, it's possible to cut the gorilla shaman for the fourth cloud.  If you run dryads over the boas (a choice I highly recommend), it's also conceivable to cut the 4th dryad for the clouds as you rarely want to see more than 1 dryad per game anyways. This has the positive effect of making the dryad that much more powerful and also reduces your reliance on either color making situations where you have to choose which land to fetch for (when you have both a lavamancer and a dryad in hand) less likely. Before you question just how worthwhile the green splash for 3 maindeck cards is, consider a.) the lighter the splash, the more resiliant the mana base b.) the dryad is a huge bomb that outright wins many games including many of fish's most difficult ones c.) green gives you a wide array of very powerful sideboard bombs.

But I rarely regret seeing a dryad and am thus likely to leave the decklist as posted. The clouds, while an extremely nice and synergetic card, is still undeniably your weakest creature.

Speaking of sideboard options, I think it's time we consider the sideboard options. The obvious cards (the ones that I rely on) are as follows...

1 Null Rod
2-3 Red Elemental Blast
1-2 Blue Elemental Blast
2-3 Oxidize
2-3 Artifact Mutation
1-2 Rack and Ruin
0-3 Naturalize
0-2 Maze of Ith
0-2 Echoing Truth
0-2 Stifle
0-2 Fire/Ice
0-2 Crucible of Worlds
0-1 Gorilla Shaman
0-1 Misdirection

Here are the other option that I don't think are powerful enough to beat out the multitudes of better options at your disposal...

Ground Seal - Correct me if I am wrong but this doesn't shutdown Crucible of Worlds does it?
Sword of Fire and Ice - Might be too mana hungry and is easily stopped by Null Rods/Oxidizes if expected.
Firestorm - While a great card, the alternatives are more versatile.
Seal of Removal/Chain of Vapor - Echoing Truth is just more versatile.
Tormod's Crypt - Your alternatives are better if only because they aren't shut down by Null Rod.
Goblin Vandal - You have better options.
Razorfin Hunter - You have better options.
Sigil of Sleep - You have better options.
Suq'Ata Firewalker - Serves too narrow a purpose.

I think that pretty much covers just about every viable sideboard inclusion including any tech I can think of.

Lmk if you know of anything else.

[mylkhead]

I have tested this deck out with 4 Quirion Dryads and I do like the idea of adding a fourth Cloud of Faeries and going down to 3 Dryads.  A lot of times it would slow me down to play a Dryad early in the game instead of the usual Faeries, untap, Spiketail.  But I like the idea of a second turn Faeries untap Dryad with next turn Curiosity + Standstill.  And most likely with a Factory on the table.  That's such a great play.  

I am also concerned about only running 3 Volcanics.  This I think hurts you if your opponent wastes at least one or two away.  With all the fetch lands, you don't usually get color screwed, but if they get Wasted, then you are left with fetching only for your Trops or an Island.  I was think about cutting that last Island for a Volcanic Island.  Anyone else see any sense in this?

[Zelyon]

If you do opt to cut the dryad count down to 3, then it yes it makes a lot of sense to cut that seventh fetchland/island for an additional volcanic island. After all, you need to reuse lavamancer, not the dryad.

I haven't ever been in a situation where the opponent wasted all of my volcanic islands though (not when there are better targets such as the mishra's factories, library of alexandria and my own wastelands to preemptively waste their wasteland). So I don't know how essential this is.

The reason I never got around to cutting the dryad is that it's just such a huge bomb. I worked the math out and approximately half of the games you play, you will be able to drop a dryad down 2nd or 3rd turn and get it to be atleast a 3/3 by next turn. Considering that all your disruption can be used even if you tap out, it's rarely a bad move to tap out to play a dryad. A 2nd or 3rd turn dryad completely wrecks just about every aggro deck I've faced including food chain goblins (essentially gobvantage since you WILL be able to stop their food chain). By next turn, they can't attack with any of their 2 power creatures. The turn after that, they can't attack, period unless they find someway to remove the dryad in spite of all the disruption you play to protect it. Between the 4 lavamancers and 4 dryads, this version of fish finally has a favorable matchup against just about every aggro deck I've played. So the decision on whether or not to cut the dryad, or if the dryad should be played at all, is entirely dependent on how often you can expect to face aggro in your meta. Though I will add that a 2nd or 3rd turn dryad gives any control match up a very hard time as well especially if they are forced to choose between removing the dryad and removing a curious fairie.

Any comments on the sideboard options? Are there any sideboard options that you think I left off or placed in the category?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think part of the problem people are having with the wtf/r manabase is that they're not running the full 3 moxen. A turn one Mox is key if your opponent has an early crucible or trinisphere (you have to go first for it to help against the 3sphere, but it means the 3sphere actually does very little to slow your tempo). The Moxes also help accelerate all the creatures--

In the interest of development, there is one experiment that I would very much like to conduct. I think it's high time we determine once and for all if fish is indeed suboptimal for not utilizing a full set of power inspite of all the colorless mana in it's casting costs.

Here's a simple test, take two identical versions of fish with the only difference being the mana base. The powered version will replace the stripmine/wastelands with a full set of power since the Mishra's Factories are essential for the standstills to work properly. Yes this means that neither version should run null rod since a fully powered fish probably shouldn't run null rod and it's very important that the decklists be identical. Mask of Memory is a very synergetic option I picked up from browsing similar threads here. It should certainly be played in any version not running Null Rods. The slightly higher creature count is justified since you play even more draw that relies on attackers, and this draw can help you find the disruption you need faster.

The build uses a single copy of stifle, daze and misdirection so I would appreciate any insights you can provide on which card you are usually happier to draw. (Whenever you draw one of those cards, note down if you would have prefered one of the other two instead.) This experiment can be a very valuable one if conducted properly. If inspite of losing such a bomb as null rod, the unpowered version of fish still fares better than the powered version against a variety of decks, I think we can officially close the book on that argument.

Note, I know that WTF/r doesn't cut wasteland and strip mine and doesn't run mox pearl and mox jet (a lot of versions do run black lotus however). Truthfully, most of the time, the mox ruby and mox emerald are colorless sources since fish runs so few non blue spells. I'm not sure how big of a difference mox pearl and mox jet makes but while we are at it, if we're already running four pieces of power, we might as well go all out and add in a full playset of power. I had no alternative but to cut the wastelands to make room for this. There are only so many colorless mana sources that a deck like fish can run before the threat density becomes far too low to matter. And cutting into the Mishra's Factory count isn't an option, especially if we want to use standstill. So the wastelands got the boot, for the sake of this test. If you insist, you can instead replace the Mox Pearl and Mox Jet with a lone stripmine and wasteland. Neither version of the deck is optimal (the unpowered one for failing to use Null Rods and the powered one for not running any wastelands). But the only way any actual data can be collected from this test is if both versions are identical except for the manabase (powered vs. unpowered).

Here are the two variants I would like to test...

Fully Powered Fish

1 Gorilla Shaman
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Spiketail Hatchling
4 Cloud of Fairies
4 Quirion Dryad

4 Force of Will
1 Daze
1 Stifle
1 Misdirection
2 Mask of Memory  
4 Curiosity
4 Standstill

1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall

4 Mishra’s Factory
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
3 Polluted Delta
4 Flooded Strand
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Jet
1 Black Lotus

versus.

Unpowered Fish without Null Rod

1 Gorilla Shaman
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Spiketail Hatchling
4 Cloud of Fairies
4 Quirion Dryad

4 Force of Will
1 Daze
1 Stifle
1 Misdirection
2 Mask of Memory
4 Curiosity
4 Standstill

1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall

4 Mishra’s Factory
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
3 Polluted Delta
4 Flooded Strand
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Mox Sapphire

Unfortunately, due to me not possessing a registered magic workstation copy and my lack of a full playset of power in a playgroup where everyone seems to detest proxies, I haven't been able to conduct this test myself more than a few times. And the results are currently still mixed and inconclusive though I will be certain to come back and post any patterns I seem to be noticing. The only input I have to make on this currently is that I very often prefer that the MisD or Stifle was a Daze in either build. I'm not sure if this has anything to do with my personal playstyle or the decks themselves. Any one interested in joining me in doing such a test? All you have to do is play a couple of games with each version and post your opinions/findings. The more people's opinions we get, the better.

[monstre]

Isn't the question of wether moxes or wastelands are better in the absence of null rod purely academic? I don't think anyone is suggesting the removal of either wastelands or null rods from fish. Are you? I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to prove here, but I don't see how your experiment is going to tell you wether you should add a single mox to your original list, say, or even a lotus.

As for the question of daze vs. misdirection vs. stifle, I've pretty much settled in favor of daze. I don't even play the lone stifle so I can accommodate a full set of cloud of faeries. I think playing any less than four is a mistake, and so is cutting the fourth dryad. I've found the threat of stifle to be more important than the actual card and, as long as everyone else continues to use it, I won't have to

Also, I'm curious why you removed the mox sapphire which even u/r fish is playing. It just doesn't make sense to me, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise because I could use some extra room to fit the gorilla shaman back in. I've gone as far as to try the lotus recently and it works surprisingly well. First turn dryads are really nice.

[Zeylon]

I guess yes, the question is mostly academic.

There wouldn't be enough of a noticable difference by cutting one or two wastelands (diluting your disruption) or threats (there is no feeling worse than mulliganing into a hand full of mana sources with nothing to play after turn one). for one or two pieces of power to know if it was indeed a good move.

What the experiment above serves to do is establish whether fish does benefit significantly from artifact acceleration even if it's mostly off color (mox ruby and mox emerald). Is this acceleration worth it to cut into the deck's threat density or it's disruption? If the unaccelerated version of fish does better inspite of the lack of null rod, I think we will have an answer.

Yes, it was a mistake to cut the mox sapphire, which is why I added it back in in place of a daze. I also took the liberty of replacing the lone stifle with a misdirection to see what the effect would be. You are right, stifle is somewhat narrow considering that you will only rarely find it when you need it and will often have it when it's suboptimal. But the threat of stifle can be golden in scaring them away from playing fetchlands. Misdirection is there to act as the 5th FoW whether protecting your creatures from targeted removal or helping win a counterwar. This deck can't really support too many FoWs so 5 seemed like a good number. It is especially rewarding to know that your opponent is hesistating to play their targeted removal after the first time a Misdirection comes out to wreck their strategy. By far, the threat of Daze is the most effective though. There is little your opponent can do if you do have a Misdirection or Stifle and they will likely go ahead and play their removal and/or fetchland anyways. But they can easily circumvent a Daze by waiting an addtional turn, and they will often do so for key spells. This one turn the threat of Daze buys can be game winning. This is why I would never cut the Daze count to below 2, and often prefer to use 3 (to ensure that it shows up often enough for them to worry about it).

For now, I'm going to go ahead and remove the gorilla shaman for a cloud of fairies as well, I'll let you know if I end up unhappy with the decision and change it back.

For reference, here is the current build and sideboard that I'm using. Not sure if it's optimal quite yet...

BTF (Better than Fish (I wish)  :lol: )

4 Grim Lavamancer  
4 Cloud of Fairies
4 Spiketail Hatchling
4 Quirion Dryad

3 Null Rod
3 Daze
4 Force of Will  
4 Curiosity
4 Standstill
1 Time Walk
1 Ancestral Recall

4 Mishra’s Factory
3 Tropical Island
3 Volcanic Island
3 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald

Sideboard
1 Null Rod
3 Red Elemental Blast
2 Blue Elemental Blast
2 Naturalize/Oxidize
2 Artifact Mutation
2 Maze of Ith
2 Gorilla Shaman/Oxidize
1 Stifle

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: This post was edited to reflect my most recent build.

The changes are as follows...

Sideboard
-1 Rack and Ruin
-2 Oxidize (is my artifact aggro hate too low?)
+2 Gorilla Shaman (great against 4c Control)
+1 Naturalize (great against randomness - Survival, Animate Dead, Food Chain etc)

Maindeck
-1 Library of Alexandria (somewhat of a win more card)
-1 Flooded Strand (not as neccesary due to the additional red and green mana source)
-1 Misdirection (Just trying out not playing it for now.)
+1 Mox Ruby
+1 Mox Emerald
+1 Daze

I made the change because the early acceleration powering out a turn one null rod, dryad, spiketail hatchling or cloud of fairies/curiosity can be a key play.

The black lotus didn't seem neccesary as I felt that this deck needs permanent mana sources, not one shot mana sources.

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

I actually ususally prefer stifle to mis-d.  Stifleing a fetchland is just soooo much tempo, and md stifle can pwn in any combo matchups, whether storm combo or dragon.  Mis-d always seems to narrow and conditional to me when I use it.  Daze and stifle are far more useful for me.

I also think cutting saphire was a mistake.  There is absolutely no reason to do it.  However, lotus can be a problem vs welder decks allowing them to weld out a rod for a previously saced lotus.  A full set of power seems really unessesary to me considering the mana curve of this deck and cloud of faeries, and certainly not dropping some of the best tempo/disruption you get from 5 strip effects.

[monstre]

I'm entertaining the idea of putting the mox ruby and emerald in the sideboard, so they don't clash with null rod. Is it worth the sideboard space just to get some acceleration in the mirror or against something like madness? I don't know. I'm terrible with sideboards though, so someone like Jacob should probably chime in about the off-color moxes. There's just not enough room to play them in the main deck as far as I'm concerned, although I think the lotus deserves some consideration (I know this is contentious).

Regarding misdirection, it feels narrower than daze to me, even though I haven't tested all that much. It can be randomly fantastic, but I dislike inconsistency and so I choose the card that is more useful on average even though it is weaker in the ideal scenario (misdirecting ancestral). It's not clear-cut however, so please let us know how your testing turns out.

[Zelyon]

I did add the mox sapphire into the latest build.

As far as putting power in the sideboard, that's just not worthwhile. Fish has so many incredible sideboard options. There is no excuse for taking away three of them just for a little bit of potential acceleration.

I really would like to find the room the mox ruby, mox emerald, and black lotus maindeck. But that's simply not possible without either cutting the colorless mana sources (aka. wastelands - bad idea IMO) or cutting the threat count (leads to mana flooding too often IMO). So this is simply not an option. If you insist, it is possible to cut the fetchland count to six, cut the library of alexandria, and cut either yet another fetchland, a single wasteland or tropical island to accomidate a single mox ruby, mox emerald, and black lotus, but I'm not sure it's worth it.

If any of you wish to take my current build posted above and try...

-1 Library of Alexandria
-1 Flooded Strand
-1 Tropical Island (or Wasteland or another Flooded Strand)
+1 Mox Ruby
+1 Mox Emerald
+1 Black Lotus

and post your results, please do so. I would welcome any input you offer. It seems like a bad idea, but it maybe worthwhile as this deck is all about the early mana. I just don't see the wisdom in cutting into solid versatile mana sources for acceleration. With the acceleration, not having anything to do first turn is pretty rare and library quickly becomes a card only useful in the midgame after a standstill and curiosity so it's really a win more card. And the Mox Ruby and Mox Emerald should compensate for one of the fetchlands though it doesn't compensate for two.

I guess the general consensus seems to be...

Daze (for it's versatility) > Stifle (for it's tempo gain and sheer brokeness against certain matchups) > Misdirection

I agree with Daze being the best and most versatile (and really like the thought of playing atleast 3). 3 Daze is what I find to be the optimal number. This ensures that late game when everyone has a good bit of mana, extra daze can always be pitched to Force of Will. It also ensures that Daze shows up often enough that your opponent is forced to play around it (which can be huge especially if you already have a spiketail hatchling in play). But it still doesn't show up often enough that you are actually hurt more than they are by your opponents playing around it.

The main reason I dislike stifle is that it neccesitates leaving an island untapped (just in anticipation that the opponent may play a fetchland or combo out next turn) in a tempo deck that loves to and can and often will prefer to use every ounce of colored mana it can get it's hands on. The other reason that I dislike stifle is that it is a dead card a significant portion of the time. This deck is even more hungry than standard fish. It's designed to be played faster and more aggressively to function optimally. When played quickly, the deck can often feel downright broken (rare for a tempo deck I know). It really really hates the idea of leaving colored mana unused.

Half the time, your opponent goes first and will play and use up their first and only critical fetchland (only an inexperienced opponent would play a dual land over a fetchland first turn). After they get out their first fetchland, they probably don't have any more and if they do, they jsut aren't very important as they'll probably have either power or dual lands to back them up. If you tap out to play a null rod to shut down their power (and it's often smart to do so), your opponent now has the opening to play their fetchland. Even if you end up going first, how many turns can you afford to slow yourself down by leaving a blue mana source open anticipating a fetchland and forcing them to wait one more turn to play it.

And just how often are you going to draw that lone stifle in your opening hand anyways? The vast majority of the time, the stifle comes out too late to be able to stop either their fetchlands.

True, there are some decks that play more stifle targets than just their fetchlands. But just how many of these situations is stifle superior to simply dazing/countering their key spell. Far more often than not, it's often better to simply counter the spell than to let it resolve and stop an activation. The lone stifle is almost never going to be drawn early enough to stop fast combo either.

As far as bluffing, you don't need to play any copies of stifle to be able to bluff an experienced opponent. Either way, bluffing often doesn't work with stifle unless having that one fetchland stifled would utterly wreck their mana base since stifle can't be played around as easily as Daze.

I do still stand by the notion that a single Misdirection is worth considering after the third Daze however. Daze can be narrow too, and downright worthless in the late game. The way I see it, Misdirection is Force of Will number 5. Against Dragon, it can misdirect the reanimation spell just as easily as stifle can stop the combo. Against tendrils combo, misdirecting a single storm copy can often be enough to buy you a turn. Sure neither of these is quite as game ending as a stifle in the same situations. But either way, your opponent usually loses the game. And better yet, you don't need to leave a mana open to use Misdriection. But Misdirection is certainly more versatile. Whether misdirecting ancestral recall, using it to win a counter war, or misdirecting a pin point removal spell, Misdirection is just as good if not better than Force of Will in many of the situations where you need Force of Will the most. Playing more than 1 Misdirection is simply not worthwhile however as you end up discarding too many cards.

[Sandster]

Misdirection is really good, and I certainly would run one (but only one) copy.  However, Misdirection does NOT affect Animate Dead or its kin.  Read the cards.

Daze usually is fine as a 2-of; good (or at least decent) players will play around Daze with their more powerful spells anyways, so it's often used as an intimidation factor.  After all, the threat of daze is as strong as the card itself.

[Zelyon]

Are you certain about the Animate Dead ruling? In our playgroup, we always played it so that we could Misdirect the Animate Dead so that it targets a creature in my graveyard (a sacced spiketail hatchling for example) rather than the Dragon in order to stop the combo from ever being initiated. But then again, we don't play very close attention to the stack and declaring each phase etc and may have simply missed the precise interaction.

Whether 3 Daze or 2 Daze is optimal is dependent on if you play that one Misdirection or not I suspect. If you do play a Misdirection, that's effectively five oppurtunities to pitch away additional Daze in the late game.